[Proposal] Staff Fighting (Dr 368) & The Great Staff Debate

stonegod · Jul 18, 2009

Well, lets do this thing!

Tondrek is contemplating Staff Fighting from Dr 368: It allows a quarterstaff to be treated at a double weapon (defensive/off-hand).

The obvious benefit is that Wizards/Artificers/others with staff implements may use their staff to gain additional AC (and AC/Reflex if they're so fortunate to have Two-Weapon Defense).

Staffs can be used as implements; they can also be used as weapons (a quarterstaff: A two-handed weapon). There is some ambiguity on whether its use as an implement is one- or two-handed. Current evidence strongly supports staff implement use is one-handed.

So, my proposal has two elements:

Allow Staff Fighting from Dr 368
Treat staffs as one-handed implements
Treat a staff as always one implement (so Dual Implement + Staff Fighting doesn't work)

Discuss.

TwoHeadsBarking · Jul 18, 2009

Would this allow you to use Dual Implement Spellcaster with one implement? I mean, I guess it should if the Two Weapon Fighting feats work too, but then it starts to get a little crazy. Let's see, four feats for:

+2 AC
+1 Reflex
+1+x damage, where x is the enhancement bonus of the staff.

That seems pretty good. Usually Dual Implement Spellcaster's limitation is adding another weapon to upkeep, but if the staff can also be a double-implement, that goes away.

Anyway, that's my concern. I do think staffs should be one-handed implements, because I don't think that overall they're better than all the other implements.

elecgraystone · Jul 18, 2009

Both sound good to me.

Take two weapon fighting and Dual Implement Spellcaster and you deal extra damage in melee AND spellcasting.

stonegod · Jul 18, 2009

TwoHeadsBarking said:
Would this allow you to use Dual Implement Spellcaster with one implement? I mean, I guess it should if the Two Weapon Fighting feats work too, but then it starts to get a little crazy. Let's see, four feats for:

+2 AC
+1 Reflex
+1+x damage, where x is the enhancement bonus of the staff.

That seems pretty good. Usually Dual Implement Spellcaster's limitation is adding another weapon to upkeep, but if the staff can also be a double-implement, that goes away.

Anyway, that's my concern. I do think staffs should be one-handed implements, because I don't think that overall they're better than all the other implements.

That is four feats, meaning you'd have to be 4th level (Human) or 6th level (anyone else) to get that... if you interpret it that way.

With Staff fighting, you're wielding a double weapon, but not a "double" implement (its still only one implement). I don't think it'd fly.

Note, a swordmage with a double sword + Dual Implement Spellcaster is wielding two implements (each weapon is one weapon... which they treat as implements).

So, my thoughts is that Dual Implement Spellcaster + Staff Fighting does not buy you anything.

ukingsken · Jul 18, 2009

Well lets see. For implement use I totally buy one handed. To fight with a staff and get power behind it you need both hands. To have an old wizard lean on it and wave it at someone to channel magic, it only requires one hand. So I'm totally down with the one handed implement, thats a big YES

I'm also ok with the staff fighting. When it first came up I drew up a fighter/wizard who used staff fighting. He was flavorfully delicious! TwoHeads barking has a point, but I kind of feel like 4 feats is quite a big cost to pay for that benefit. Especially when you extend it to paragon/epic levels when other feats can do similar things, probably in less then 4 feats.

I guess that to me if you want to spend 4 feats for that benefit, then why not? Thats a heavy price to pay.

elecgraystone · Jul 19, 2009

stonegod said:
With Staff fighting, you're wielding a double weapon, but not a "double" implement (its still only one implement). I don't think it'd fly.

The only thing is both ends ARE staffs with there own plus. It's the same way a double sword's ends both work for a swordmage. In essence, the staff is a weapon used an an implement. The only way it doesn't work is if somehow one end isn't a staff.

stonegod said:
Note, a swordmage with a double sword + Dual Implement Spellcaster is wielding two implements (each weapon is one weapon... which they treat as implements).

Yep, and each end of the staff would be a magic staff. Look at it this way. If someone bought a magic weapon and it was a staff, it'd still work as an implement even though it wasn't bought an an implement right? Same for the off hand of the staff. It's still a magic staff.

stonegod · Jul 19, 2009

elecgraystone said:
Yep, and each end of the staff would be a magic staff. Look at it this way. If someone bought a magic weapon and it was a staff, it'd still work as an implement even though it wasn't bought an an implement right? Same for the off hand of the staff. It's still a magic staff.

Each end would be a magic quarterstaff, not a magic staff (Staff Fighting calls this out specifically), its still only one implement.

Like I said, they are both interpretations with plausible arguments for each and something we judges have to decide. My (now modified) proposal is to treat a quarterstaff with Staff Fighting still as one implement. Folks can choose to say no to that (meaning it is two implements) if they so wish (i.e., like UK has seem to have done).

elecgraystone · Jul 19, 2009

stonegod said:
Each end would be a magic quarterstaff, not a magic staff (Staff Fighting calls this out specifically), its still only one implement.

I don't see that it matters that it's a quarterstaff. If you look under the weapon listing quarterstaff, the weapon group is staff. Staff is the implement that wizards use and it's a weapon group like light blade is for a swordmage. So if a new weapon, lets say the jo stick, gets the weapon group staff, it would be a perfectly usable implement for wizards.

stonegod said:
they are both interpretations with plausible arguments for each.

Honestly, I don't how the off end of the staff could ever NOT be in the staff weapon group so I can't see that the interpitation that it isn't an implement is plausible.

stonegod said:
My (now modified) proposal is to treat a quarterstaff with Staff Fighting still as one implement.

Sure, that can be added to the feat. I think it's kind of a big nerf though since other classes get two implements with there double weapons.

stonegod · Jul 21, 2009

Further discussion/votes?

renau1g · Jul 21, 2009

I vote YES on the following:

Allow Staff Fighting from Dr 368
Treat staffs as one-handed implements
Treat a staff as always one implement (so Dual Implement + Staff Fighting doesn't work)

I see a staff as being fine to be held and pointed with one hand. (If Gandalf can do it everyone should be able to, especially a half-orc

)